Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Discriminating Between Research and Care in Paediatric Oncology—Ethical Appraisal of the ALL-10 and 11 Protocols of the Dutch Childhood Oncology Group (DCOG)

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Ethics and Governance of Biomedical Research

Part of the book series: Research Ethics Forum ((REFF,volume 4))

  • 487 Accesses

Abstract

Paediatric oncology is a classic example of a field in which research and care are closely intertwined. Moreover, bioethicists have argued that in environments such as paediatric oncology we should no longer draw sharp distinctions between research and care. Recently, two Dutch protocols for the treatment of children with Acute Lymphoblastic Leukaemia (ALL) have been categorised in two different ways, one as research (ALL-11) and the other as treatment (ALL-10). We analysed these protocols in order to explore whether the distinction between research and care in paediatric oncology is morally relevant. We applied several characteristics of research to the ALL-10 and 11 protocols: the goal of producing generalisable knowledge; systematic collection of data; potentially high and uncertain risks; burdens and risks unrelated to treatment; and provision of treatment according to detailed protocols. Both ALL-protocols exhibit general characteristics of research. At the same time, both protocols also clearly satisfy the objective of delivering the best available treatment. Therefore, it remains to be discussed how to review these kinds of protocols that integrate a research goal with the objective of providing individual patients with best current treatment. A change in both research ethics regulation and oversight of conventional care is needed. More case studies are essential to expand the moral evaluation of the intertwinement between research and care in paediatric oncology.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Ablett, S., and C.R. Pinkerton. 2003. Recruiting children into cancer trials—role of the United Kingdom Children’s Cancer Study Group (UKCCSG). British Journal of Cancer 88: 1661–1665.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP). 1995. Informed consent, parental permission, and assent in pediatric practice. Pediatrics 95: 314–317.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beauchamp, T.L. 2011. Viewpoint: Why our conceptions of research and practice may not serve the best interest of patients and subjects. Journal of Internal Medicine 269: 383–387.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bleyer, W.A. 1997. The U.S. pediatric cancer clinical trials programmes: International implications and the way forward. European Journal of Cancer 33: 1439–1447.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brody, H., and F.G. Miller. 2003. The clinician-investigator. Unavoidable but manageable tension. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 13: 329–346.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Conroy, S., C. Newman, and S. Gudka. 2003. Unlicensed and off label drug use in acute lymphoblastic leukaemia and other malignancies in children. Annals of Oncology 14: 42–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences (CIOMS). 2002. International ethical guidelines for biomedical research involving human subjects. Geneva.

    Google Scholar 

  • Council of Europe (CoE). 2005. Additional protocol to the convention on human rights and biomedicine, concerning biomedical research. Strasbourg.

    Google Scholar 

  • de Vries, M.C., M. Houtlosser, J.M. Wit, D.P. Engberts, D. Bresters, G.J. Kaspers, and E. van Leeuwen. 2011. Ethical issues at the interface of clinical care and research practice in pediatric oncology: A narrative review of parents’ and physicians’ experiences. BMC Medical Ethics 12: 18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • European Parliament (EP). Directive 2001/20/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (Apr 4 2001).

    Google Scholar 

  • European Parliament (EP). Regulation (EC) No 1901/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council (Dec 12, 2006).

    Google Scholar 

  • European Parliament (EP). Regulation (EU) No 536/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council (Apr 16, 2014).

    Google Scholar 

  • Grady, C. 1991. Ethical issues in clinical trials. Seminars in Oncology Nursing 7: 288–296.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gupta, T., S. Kannan, V. Dantkale, and S. Laskar. 2011. Cyclophosphamide plus total body irradiation compared with busulfan plus cyclophosphamide as a conditioning regimen prior to hematopoietic stem cell transplantation in patients with leukemia: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Hematology/Oncology and Stem Cell Therapy 4: 17–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Joffe, S., and J.C. Weeks. 2002. Views of American oncologists about the purposes of clinical trials. Journal of the National Cancer Institute 94: 1847–1853.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kass, N.E., R.R. Faden, S.N. Goodman, P. Pronovost, S. Tunis, and T.L. Beauchamp. 2013. The research-treatment distinction: A problematic approach for determining which activities should have ethical oversight. The Hastings Center Report 43(s1): S4–S15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kimland, E., P. Nydert, V. Odlind, Y. Bottiger, and S. Lindemalm. 2012. Paediatric drug use with focus on off-label prescriptions at Swedish hospitals – A nationwide study. Acta Paediatrica 101: 772–778.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krueger, G. 2008. Hope and suffering children, cancer and the paradox of experimental medicine. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Largent, E.A., S. Joffe, and F.G. Miller. 2011. Can research and care be ethically integrated? The Hastings Center Report 41: 37–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lindell-Osuagwu, L., M.J. Korhonen, S. Saano, M. Helin-Tanninen, T. Naaranlahti, and H. Kokki. 2009. Off-label and unlicensed drug prescribing in three paediatric wards in Finland and review of the international literature. Journal of Clinical Pharmacy and Therapeutics 34: 277–287.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Linsenmeier, C., D. Thoennessen, L. Negretti, J.P. Bourquin, T. Streller, U.M. Lutolf, et al. 2010. Total body irradiation (TBI) in pediatric patients. A single-center experience after 30 years of low-dose rate irradiation. Strahlentherapie und Onkologie 186: 614–620.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nachman, J.B., H.N. Sather, M.G. Sensel, M.E. Trigg, J.M. Cherlow, J.N. Lukens, et al. 1998. Augmented post-induction therapy for children with high-risk acute lymphoblastic leukemia and a slow response to initial therapy. New England Journal of Medicine 338: 1663–1671.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research (NCPHSBBR). 1979. The Belmont Report. Ethical principles and guidelines for the protection of human subjects. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pandolfini, C., and M. Bonati. 2005. A literature review on off-label drug use in children. European Journal of Pediatrics 164: 552–558.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peeters, M., and A. Poon. 1987. Down syndrome and leukemia: Unusual clinical aspects and unexpected methotrexate sensitivity. European Journal of Pediatrics 146: 416–422.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pieters, R. 2010. Acute lymphoblastic leukaemia in children and adolescents: Chance of cure now higher than 80 %. Nederlands Tijdschrift voor Geneeskunde 154: A1577.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stichting Kinderoncologie Nederland (SKION) Richtlijn follow-up na kinderkanker. SKION; 2010.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stiller C. 2009. Incidence of childhood leukaemia. World Health Organization Europe.

    Google Scholar 

  • Szczepanski, T., A. Orfao, V.H. van der Velden, J.F. San Miguel, and J.J. van Dongen. 2001. Minimal residual disease in leukaemia patients. The Lancet Oncology 2: 409–417.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ‘t Jong, G.W., A.G. Vulto, M. de Hoog, K.J. Schimmel, D. Tibboel, and J.N. van den Anker. 2000. Unapproved and off-label use of drugs in a children’s hospital. New England Journal of Medicine 343: 1125.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van den Berg, H., and N. Tak. 2011. Licensing and labelling of drugs in a paediatric oncology ward. British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology 72: 474–481.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Dongen, J.J., T. Seriu, E.R. Panzer-Grumayer, A. Biondi, M.J. Pongers-Willemse, L. Corral, et al. 1998. Prognostic value of minimal residual disease in acute lymphoblastic leukaemia in childhood. Lancet 352: 1731–1738.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Thiel, G.J.M.W., and J.J.M. van Delden. 2010. Reflective equilibrium as a normative empirical model. Ethical Perspectives 17: 183–202.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Verschuur, A.C. 2004. De plaats van klinische trials in de kinderoncologie. Ned Tijdschr Oncol 1(1): 30–33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weijer, C., and P.B. Miller. 2003. Therapeutic obligation in clinical research. The Hastings Center Report 33: 19–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whitlock, J.A. 2006. ∁. British Journal of Haematology 135: 595–602.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • WMO Medical Research involving Human Beings Act (Mar 1, 2006).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Medical Humanities, University Medical Center Utrecht, Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, 85500, 3508 GA, Utrecht, The Netherlands

    Sara A. S. Dekking, Rieke van der Graaf, Martine C. de Vries, Marc B. Bierings & Johannes J. M. van Delden

Authors
  1. Sara A. S. Dekking
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Rieke van der Graaf
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Martine C. de Vries
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Marc B. Bierings
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Johannes J. M. van Delden
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sara A. S. Dekking .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Hannover Medical School, Institute for History, Ethics and Philos, Hannover, Germany

    Daniel Strech

  2. University Hospital Cologne, Research Unit Ethics, Institute for Hist, Cologne, Germany

    Marcel Mertz

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Dekking, S.A.S., van der Graaf, R., de Vries, M.C., Bierings, M.B., van Delden, J.J.M. (2016). Discriminating Between Research and Care in Paediatric Oncology—Ethical Appraisal of the ALL-10 and 11 Protocols of the Dutch Childhood Oncology Group (DCOG). In: Strech, D., Mertz, M. (eds) Ethics and Governance of Biomedical Research. Research Ethics Forum, vol 4. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-28731-7_5

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation